Upcoming Study Groups

No study groups are scheduled now.

To become a member of the study group listed above: (1) Become a registered member of SGO; (2) go back to the home page; (3) click the particular study group link; (4) click the Details tab; and (5) click the Participate button.

SGO: Study Groups for Objectivists

SGO provides a platform for serious students of philosophy and history--who are also Objectivists. The brief schedule and short assignments aid individuals who are full-time students or employees. The procedure is to read each weekly assignment, take notes, and then report with a summary, an outline, a discussion of one element, or an elaborated question (explaining why the question is both important and difficult to answer). The benefits--deeper understanding and new perspectives--come from steady, scheduled, and focused study while trading insights and questions with others intrigued by the same text. See the Aug. 29, 2008 post for details.

Etiquette

The post for Nov. 18, 07 describes the strict and unusual etiquette for commenting.

Contributors

Purpose and Scope

PURPOSE. I intend to ask questions and offer tentative answers. I welcome criticism from fellow students of Objectivism, i.e., those individuals who are (1) studying Ayn Rand's philosophy, including her philosophy of history; and (2) agree with every element studied. Criticism here means identifying errors, raising questions, and offering better answers. The learning process is a long spiral. Making progress matters.

SCOPE. My questions arise in philosophy; philosophy of history; history of philosophy; history of ideas; cultural history; intellectual history; socio-intellectual history; the arts of studying and writing history; and the reading and writing of serious fiction having historical or philosophical themes.

Objectivist Weblog Directory

Apr 30, 2011

This is the second in a series of three posts sketching my preliminary understanding of democratic, sacred, and profane culture.

RELIGIOUS MEANING. Normally I see the term/concept "sacred" used by religious individuals, for example, Biblical writers writing about the prescribed construction of the sacred Ark of the Covenant, at Exodus 25, and the penalty of death for touching the sacred ark, at 1 Chronicles 13:9-10.[1] Religionists typically apply the term/idea of "sacred" to elements of their own religion, which is a worldview based on mysticism. Sometimes advocates of conservatism -- the ideology defined by the four essential values of God, Tradition, Nation, and Family -- use the term "sacred" to describe personal characteristics such as honor. Even then, the religionists often tie this use of the term back to their religion through such supernaturalist notions as "God-given rights."

OBJECTIVE MEANING. Does "sacred" have meaning outside a religious context? Philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982) explains the historical background for such a concept:

But you must remember that religion is an early form of philosophy, that the first attempts to explain the universe, to give a coherent frame of reference to man's life and a code of moral values, were made by religion, before man graduated or developed enough to have a philosophy.[2]

Within that frame of reference, Ayn Rand points at

a special category of abstractions, the most exalted one, which, for centuries, as been the near monopoly of religion: ethics ... with the emotional connotations of height, uplift, nobility, reverence, grandeur, which pertain to the realm of man's values, but which religion has arrogated to itself . . . .[3]

In a religious and therefore supernaturalist context, she explains, such concepts as "sacred" have no earthly referent. In a secular context, however, such concepts do have objective meaning. Ayn Rand continues:

What, then, is their source or referent in reality? It is the entire emotional realm of man's dedication to a moral ideal. ... It is this highest level of man's emotion that has to be redeemed from the murk of mysticism and redirected at its proper object: man.[4] ...

[Consider] the look on a child's face when he grasps the answer to some problem he has been striving to understand. It is a radiant look of joy, of liberation, almost of triumph .... If you have seen this look, or experienced it, you know that if there is such a concept as 'sacred' -- meaning: the best, the highest possible to man-- this look is the sacred, the not-to-be-betrayed, the not-to-be-sacrificed for anything or anyone.[5] (Bold added)

A PERSONAL DEFINITION. What is the sacred in man? I use the term sacred to refer to those personal attributes -- and their artifacts -- that an individual requires to survive and flourish. Examples are his pride (moral ambition), his dignity, his capacity for exaltation, his central purpose in life, his faculty of reason, and his self-esteem.[6]

I think that an objective man psychologically has a "sense of the sacred." It is an expression of his awareness -- at all times, even if only in the background of his mind -- that his life is his fundamental value and that maintaining that value requires -- as inviolable -- certain other supporting values to be sacred.

A man who has a sense of the sacred does not laugh at himself; nor does he sanction diminution by others. A man who has a sense of the sacred is dignified and he is respectful to others -- as were the moral characters of Ayn Rand's novels and as was the novelist herself.[7] A man who has a sense of the sacred is a man who strives to be the best he can be in all ways -- from the quality of his work, at whatever level it may be, to his manner of dress and style of speaking. In contrast, a profane man not only accepts low standards, he flaunts them.

[1] For a Christian's discussion of sacred and profane in a religious context, with Biblical quotations: Kent Brandenburg, "The Culture War: Sacred, Common, and Profane Culture," Feb. 21, 2008, on the weblog Jack Hammer, at: http://jackhammer.wordpress.com/2008/02/21/sacred-common-and-profane-culture/. Brandenburg rejects multiculturalism, egalitarianism, skepticism, and other modern ideas that undermine the idea of the sacred in Christianity. He is a clear and entertaining writer -- and a worthy opponent in the war between reason and mysticism. [2] For the quoted passage: Ayn Rand, "Playboy's Interview with Ayn Rand," pamphlet, p. 10, cited in The Ayn Rand Lexicon, under "Religion," p. 411. [3] For the quoted passage: Ayn Rand, "Playboy's Interview with Ayn Rand," pamphlet, p. 10, cited in The Ayn Rand Lexicon, under "Religion," p. 414. [4] For the quoted passage: Ayn Rand, "Introduction to The Fountainhead", 25th Anniversary Edition, reproduced in The Ayn Rand Lexicon, p. 415, excerpted from The Objectivist, March 1968, p. 4. [5] For the quoted passage: Ayn Rand, "Sacred," in The Ayn Rand Lexicon, quoting from "Requiem for Man," Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, p. 303. [6] For the meaning of "exaltation," see Andy Clarkson's inspiring and informative collection of comments, at his weblog, Exalted Moments, http://exaltedmoments.blogspot.com. The antidote for encountering elements of profane culture is the experience of one's own exalted moments or even merely the observation of others' exalted moments. [7] In Ayn Rand's novels, examples of moral characters, at various levels of achievement, having a "sense of the sacred" are Howard Roark (The Fountainhead), Austin Heller (The Fountainhead), John Galt (Atlas Shrugged), and Dagny Taggart (Atlas Shrugged). (For the latter, I am thinking in particular of the scene in which Dagny Taggart kills the guard outside the torture chamber.) For glimpses of Ayn Rand's own sense of the sacred, study Scott Connell, 100 Voices: An Oral History of Ayn Rand, available at the Ayn Rand Bookstore.

Apr 24, 2011

This is the first in a series of three posts sketching my preliminary understanding of democratic, sacred, and profane culture.

Understanding a culture in a particular period involves identifying not only the elements of that culture, but their interrelationships too. Are there patterns among the cultural elements? Which of the elements are causes and which are the effects?[1] This post is a sketch of one pattern among many in the overall culture of America today.

ORIGIN. The democratic movement is the movement of individuals who are striving to establish and expand a democratic society.[2] The term "democracy," for these individuals, names a concept that covers far more than only a particular form of government. One democratic activist, Yale University professor of constitutional law Jack M. Balkin, explains his view of democracy and identifies the root of the democratic movement:

The ultimate goal of our constitutional order is not merely to produce democratic procedures but a democratic culture: a culture in which all citizens can participate and feel that they have a stake, a culture in which unjust social privileges and status hierarchies have been disestablished. . . . Democracy inheres not only in procedural mechanisms like universal suffrage but in cultural modes like dress, language, manners, and behavior. Political egalitarianism must be nourished by cultural egalitarianism.[3]

Democratic culture is about individual liberty as well as collective self-governance; it concerns each individual's ability to participate in the production and distribution of culture. Removing the political, economical, and cultural elitists from their thrones and allowing everyone a chance to participate in the production of culture, sounds like a wonderful idea in my opinion.[4]

Culture, in its broadest meaning, refers to all those artifacts which can be produced by individuals in one generation and bequeathed to later generations. Democratic culture is the set of cultural elements produced by members of the democratic movement as part of their effort to create democracy.

EXAMPLES. Examples of democratic culture include: magazine articles calling for "net neutrality"; rap music lyrics berating the "elite"; Harvard philosophy professor John Rawls's book Theory of Justice (1971); a progressive income tax used to fund redistribution of income from the most productive to the least productive; "stakeholder" organizations who try, in corporate stockholders' meetings, to influence business policies and products to benefit "the people"; tax-funded "public" libraries that give everyone equal access to information; and support for folk art or the "everyday art" of "the people."

PHILOSOPHICAL ROOTS. Certain institutions are also examples of democratic culture. An institution is an organization designed to continue operating even after the resignation, retirement, or death of the founding members. For instance, consider one particular institution, The Center for Democratic Culture, which is housed in the Sociology Department of the University of Nevada. Its CDC Mission Statement reveals the institution's underlying philosophy:

The Center for Democratic Culture ... derives its philosophy from American pragmatism, which regards democracy as an ongoing experiment in collective living and institution building. Democracy, according to [philosopher of Pragmatism] John Dewey [1859-1952], begins at home in a neighborly community, and is first and foremost a quality of experience.[5]

"Quality of experience" is a euphemism for life in an all-encompassing culture and society of egalitarian collectivism. And that is what democratic culture is: the culture of egalitarian collectivism.